|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 28. March 2007 02:10
In further support of my contention that we may be "prescribed" in our world views -
"Our actions should be based on the ever-present awareness that human beings in their thinking, feeling, and acting are not free but are just as causally bound as the stars in their motion."
Albert Einstein
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 29. March 2007 05:18
Please also check my comment # 16 at the same site. I am getting typer's cramp and it will save my fingers. Thanks.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable"
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 30. March 2007 09:31
I invite all to visit my blog
evolutionisfinished.blogspot.com/
to witness the lengths to which some coward posting as charles darwin is willing to go to sabotage that blog.
I can't imagine a better demonstration that, as they say in the military, I have "reached out and touched some one." I have better things to do than to attempt to stop such uncivilized, vicious and unethical behavior. It speaks for itself. His or her cowardly comments can stand forever as far as I am concerned.
"Pigs is pigs."
anonymous
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 30. March 2007, 09:33: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 30. March 2007 12:25
John,
your blog doesn't work properly anymore. It's difficult to open the site and it's almost impossible to reach its end. Obviously you have some "friend" who have sent there some nonsense - probably collected nonsenses of Dawkins - how selfish gene climbing mount improbable created extended phenotype.
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 30. March 2007 16:19
Martin
This is not the first time I have had a blog vandalized. Actually it is a tribute and I accept it as such. As I said -
Pigs is pigs, in this particular case a Darwinian pig.
Believe it or not,
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 30. March 2007 17:07
John,
what is your opinion on Leo Berg's claim, that some structures reveal themselves so to say in advance (as hidden potentialities that show up) and having no fuction persist or vanish into air and yet then re-appear again in unrelated higher organisms and have some vital functions? That's seems to be very interesting.
[ 30. March 2007, 17:17: Message edited by: Martin ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 31. March 2007 05:18
I hope that if someone can learn the identity of the "charles darwin" that has vandalized and destroyed my blog, that they will air his identity. He or she deserves to be exposed.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 02. April 2007, 06:31: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 31. March 2007 09:46
Martin
The phenomenon to which you refer is in perfect accord with the Preformed Evolutionary Hypothesis. Berg called it "phylogenetic acceleration." I have called it "phylogenetic derepression." The appearance of a true placenta in certain sharks is a beautiful example. Since the placenta appeared in sharks, the information must have been present long before the appearance of the mammals. I have discussed this whole business in detail in the Manifesto and elsewhere so there is no point in repeating myself here. I refer you to the Manifesto, section VII - 2 and to my published paper "Ontogeny, Phylogeny and the Origin of Biological Information. Rivista di Biologia 93: 513-524, 2000.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 01. April 2007 03:51
I see John. Anyway placenta etc. has function in sharks. So darwinists claim it has arisen from RM and natural selection and the similarity to mammalian placenta is "superficial" - I have had such discussion already.
In the case the structure has no any meaning and function for species darwinists cannot claim such nonsenses. If such structure is not tracable to ancestor having there some function the problem is unsolvable by darwinistic dyada RM/NS.
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 01. April 2007 19:01
Martin
Of course you are right. However there is no point in kicking the dead Darwinian horse. It is the most failed hypothesis in the history of science. How any thinking person can possibly consider it is beyond me. I ridicule it and its atheist proponents openly and without reservation. It is the only way to deal with ideologues of whatever persuasion, atheist or theist. There is no place in science for such considerations yet that is all we see, blog after blog, forum after forum. "Brainstorms" remains a notable exception for which I am grateful. Anonymity here is the exception rather than the rule, a criterion by which all forums should be rated.
It is all a monument to "prescribed" irreversible "born that way" ideology of you ask me. Nothing is ever advanced especially in the ephemeral world of the internet where cowardly anonymity is acceptable and personal denigration the order of the day. It should never have been allowed. Internet communication is in a sad state as a result.
"Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics and it springs from the same source....They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres."
Albert Einstein
Long before Einstein -
"Of all the senseless babble I have ever had occasion to read, the demonstrations of these philosophers who undertake to tell us all about the nature of God would be the worst, if they were not surpassed by the still greater absurdities of the philosophers who try to prove there is no God."
Thomas Henry Huxley, from "Aphorisms and Reflections." Henrietta A. Huxley, London, Watts and Company, 1911.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 02. April 2007 07:08
Here is my list of the 10 most recent contributors at the most popular thread at After The Bar Closes.
Blipey
stevestory
k.e.
Kristine
phonon
N. Wells
Reciprocating Bill
Zachriel
"Rev Dr" Lenny Frank
Cedric Katesby
Many of these were repeat offenders which is typical of many forums.
At Uncommon Descent I had to go through the 5 most recent threads to find 10 responders. Apparently interest in UD is waning. Here they are.
GilDodgen
russ
kairos
russ
bork
crandaddy
eebroom
mattghg
William Dembski
Mats
It seems both forums are pretty heavy with anonymity don't you think? I have no idea who most of these people are. I am pretty sure only about Dembski and Dodgen.
Do you see what I mean about anonymity?
A past evolution is undeniable. a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 02. April 2007 07:41
I can understand the decline in comments at Uncommon Descent. DaveScot (David Springer) bans people right and left for the slightest of reasons, typically not even explained. He just banned Ilion. Didn't Ilion used to post here? Who is left to participate at Uncommon Descent. Who dares to comment, to question Dembski's blogczar? Not very many as one can see.
Even Panda's Thumb has not banned a fraction of the number banned by David Springer alone. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on ones perspective, I happen to be one of them at both venues as well as ARN, EvC, Pharyngula, The Austringer, Sandwalk, etc., etc., etc.
I love it so!
By comparison, I would like to see how many souls have been banned here at "brainstorms." I venture they could be counted on the fingers of both hands, perhaps even one.
It is easy to believe isn't it?
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 08. April 2007 02:04
http://www.uncommondescent.com/wp-login.php?redirect_to=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/the-end-of-evolution-a-prophetic-picture/
Over at Uncommon Descent, Dembski has posted the above about evolution "going out of business." As a matter of fact it HAS, although one would never think so judging from the responses. There is not a shred of evidence for creative evolution at present, not a new genus in two million years, or a documentable new species in historical times. The entire evolutionary history has been a sequence of decreasing activity with the higher taxonomic categories (phyla) being the first to appear and then cease appearing with the lower categories to follow in orderly sequence, until today there is probably not a single living creature on earth that can ever become anything very different from what it is right now. Just as ontogeny ends with death so evolution has ended with its counterpart, extinction. Both phenomena involve a progressive loss of potentiality terminating in finality and irreversibility. Ontogeny has always been the model for phylogeny, and just as Leo Berg claimed -
"Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance."
Nomogenesis, page 134.
How others can ignore this transparent reality escapes me entirely. They must be abysmally ignorant of the literature. It was obviously recognized, documented and discussed by Broom, Grasse, Huxley and Schindewolf and most recently by myself here in the Manifesto. I can only conclude that none of us are recognized by either faction of the present debate, a debate which should never have take place. It was the ID folks that claimed Intelligent Design was a mere "inference." That is what initiated this crazy debate. Nothing could be further from the truth.
EVERYTHING is determined... by forces over which we have no control."
Albert Einstein, my emphasis.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
When ideology encounters cold hard facts, ideology may carry the day but cannot win the war.
"If you tell the truth, you can be certain, sooner or later, to be found out."
Oscar Wilde
I love it so!
Yes indeed, evolution IS "going out of business." It has been "out of business" for a very long time. Trust me.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 09. April 2007, 15:30: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 09. April 2007 10:45
I am fascinated by Dembski's thread to which I alluded in my last post. The origin of the title of the thread - "The End of Evolution - A Prophetic Picture" is not identified so apparently Dembski dreamed it up out of thin air. As far as I know I am the only one who has recently claimed that evolution HAS ended so I assume the thread was produced for my consumption and ridicule. Accordingly, being unable to respond at Uncommon Descent, I responded here as my last post attests.
But that is not the half of it folks.
Consider the following verbatim excerpt from an email I received from DaveScot (David Springer) dated September 26, 2006 4:38 PM
"I started reading all your papers myself and I'm still amazed by how it all fits together and rings true. They surely convinced me. But I still think elan vital is bs. Write a paper on it and see if you can change my mind. All your other papers did. If you recall from our first encounter I didn't believe that evolution had ended. I do now. When you're right your're right. You put all the evidentiary ducks in a row and they lead to no other reasonable conclusion."
As I said this is verbatim, including his mispelled "your're."
Incidentally, I don't believe I have ever mentioned Henri Bergson's "elan vital."
This is the same David Springer who banned me twice and twice removed my papers from the side board at Uncommon Descent.
I will let others draw their own conclusions about his integrity. I drew mine long ago.
If anyone challenges the veracity of my excerpt, let me know and I will be happy to forward the whole email.
Isn't the internet a wonder?
"What goes around comes around."
anonymous
It is hard to believe isn't it?
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 09. April 2007, 15:24: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
